If that’s all it was, that would be one thing. What I see is people shitting on the strawman society constructed in her image.
A person of the land.
You mean the snowflakes who were offended by both room scenes with toilets? The same ones who were offended by married couples sleeping in the same bed? The same ones offended by an inter-racial kiss?
Oh wait, those snowflakes weren’t “today’s snowflakes” at.
Older generations were just as easily offended back in the day. They were just offended by even dumber shit.
“He used the N-word, like, so many times! Literally a billion times! And I was, like, you know? We shouldn’t be using that word”
The common clay of the new West.
Oh, that blogger has her opinion. That movie was meant to be shocking and gratuitous, what, 40ish years ago? We’ve come a long way in that time, and it does not surprise me that younger people today are extra shocked by it.
I’d be curious to see reviews from the 70s about Blazing Saddles. I’d bet that there were similar opinions then, too.
it’s not about being “shocked,” it’s the insistence that “you can’t joke about racism!”
Trying to paint this as some unique problem to young people today is utterly ridiculous, though. What about everyone who got offended when an athlete wouldn’t stand for the national anthem? We’re they all “Today’s Audience” too?
I can at least say that Blazing Saddles was required viewing this semester in my friend’s college film course. I’m not sure what the professor is saying about the film but it’s still out there.
What I find annoying about the essay is that the author denies finding the movie funny. Okay, I can accept that. What I don’t accept is the whole ‘I don’t find this movie funny, therefore I am a superior person who would never find racism funny.’ attitude that oozes from the author.
As a Broadcast Journalism major who was the movie reviewer for my college paper, I think I have the ability to recognize what Bethany is doing. I’m not “shitting on her,” I’ve been there.
I do enjoy the irony of someone actively searching for examples of people “looking for reasons to be outraged”, so that they can then be outraged about the outrage.
I’m outraged you said that!
well, it is in the Library of Congress’s National Film Registry as “culturally significant.”
I’d be worried about a fuel-air explosion, but the methane concentration was probably too high. :eek:
Bethany’s been blogging for 2 years and has 8 followers, if she wants to be taken more seriously as a movie c****c, rogerebert.cc is available and could easily triple that number.
I see that you have mastered the art of whataboutism.
From your link,
Emphasis mine. The argument I am addressing is that “Today’s Audience” is too easily offended. Showing that a group that’s pretty much the polar opposite of “Today’s Audience” is just as easily offended IS directly refuting the argument.
Hardly outraged. Mostly disappointed. The thread title promised a reaction essay to Blazing Saddles and I was looking forward to a real nice 40 years on retrospective on a movie that I enjoy. Instead I got a fart and a “hurr durr this girl is so stupid”.
If meant to be funny, the article is an F. If meant to be a Poe’s Law self-referencing circular “wait, is it Poe’s or not Poe’s?”, then A++.
This reminds me of the Pit thread about sealion-ing, where some posters couldn’t even tell if they or others were sealioning in a discussion about sealioning. The head starts to run in circles and hurt.